What's the best way to minimize the need of run time checks?

[Juan Pablo Romero Méndez]

2016-08-12 1:10 GMT-07:00 Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99 at gmail.com>:

> On Thursday, August 11, 2016 at 8:33:41 AM UTC+12, Juan Pablo Romero
> Méndez wrote:
>
> > I've been trying to find (without success so far) an example of a
> situation
> > where the dynamic features of a language like Python provides a clear
> > advantage over languages with more than one type.
>
> I have used, and continue to use, both static and dynamic languages.
>
> With static languages, once a piece of code compiles without errors, you
> have a slightly higher level of confidence in its correctness than with a
> dynamic language.
>
> On the other hand, a dynamic language allows me to be much more
> productive, because I have to write less code to begin with.
>

>From your point of view, dynamic languages are more concise?


>
> The closest I can offer for an apples-to-apples comparison is PyCairo <
> https://github.com/ldo/pycairo> versus Qahirah <https://github.com/ldo/
> qahirah>. Both are Python bindings for the Cairo graphics library; the
> former is written in C as a Python extension module, the latter is done in
> pure Python using ctypes.
>
> I didn’t write the former; I merely tried to rescue it from abandonment to
> see if I could fill in a few more missing features. And what I found was,
> it would be quicker to start again from scratch than to continue working on
> it.
> --
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>